do they grope Federal passengers on Air Force One too ?..anyone wanna bet ?
also , three main laws to the un-Constitutional Patriot Act , given to us by Republicans to erase some civil liberties , will expire at mid-night tonite...
we need State's rights now more than ever to fight Socialism and keep our freedoms , IMHO..
-- Posted by Rick* on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 2:29 PM
I was at the Capitol yesterday afternoon and early evening Wheels. It was a pretty impressive showing of men, women, and children Texas patriots. I've got to run now, but I will post more on this subject later.
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 3:48 PM
Rick, I think someone was accused of that once a couple of presidents ago.
What if Texas had a law making it illegal for a TSA agent to steal money from one's wallet during a pat down, would the feds shut down air traffic?
Wait, I bet that is illegal. How exempt from reasonable state law is the TSA?
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 3:56 PM
Rick wrote:
"also , three main laws to the un-Constitutional Patriot Act , given to us by Republicans to erase some civil liberties , will expire at mid-night tonite..."
It passed the house 357-66, and the Senate 98-1, before being signed by President Bush. That's called 'bi-partisan' in todayspeak.
It was also extended by the Democrat-Controlled Congress and Senate and signed by Mr. Obama, sans reforms, in 2010. Yet, you insist on citing it as a Republican effort. Why?
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 4:16 PM
OOps, My post was meant for the other thread.
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 4:23 PM
Never mind the OOps, I just thought I was wrong but wasn't.
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 4:33 PM
Old John,
I thought I was wrong once but found out I was mistaken. ;-)~
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 5:08 PM
The extension has passed and is on the way to Europe for signature.
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 5:51 PM
Hunter
i will always consider the Patriot Act as Republican the same as i will always consider National Healthcare Act as Democratic because of it's origin .
i can't blame Mr.Obama due to the fact he doesn't know what's going on the majority of the time if the issue isn't Socialism .
the main point is the laws that say the Government can stop anyone , anytime , for anything at their whim , expire tonite .
-- Posted by Rick* on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 6:03 PM
why hassle people who are minding their own business ?
-- Posted by Rick* on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 7:42 PM
I don't have a big problem with interception of incoming overseas phone calls from countries known to be base for terrorist.
I do have a problem with the local, state, or fed that wants to pull someone over late at night on a lonely stretch of highway because the car "Looked a little low in the back".
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, May 26, 2011, at 9:39 PM
Wheels, this was an in your face show of Obama / Eric Holder Chicago Mafia style intimidation and a type of Prior Restraint against the State of Texas. This was a blatant assault not only on Texans, but on the people of every state. If one federal thug lawyer can do this to Texas, they can do it to you.
Obama's Dept. of "Justice" told Texas that if this bill was passed, Texas would be a no fly zone. In a non Police State, the way this country used to be, a state could pass any law they wished. But if the feds had a problem with it, they would get a restraining order until a federal court could rule on it. If they can get away with this, then we might as well do away with state governments.
The full Texas House passed a bill 138-0 making it a criminal offense for TSA agents to, without probable cause, touch or fondle the "private parts" of airline passengers in Texas. The Senate was on board 30-1 to pass the bill. But the 1 dissenter was the RINO Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst. The Lieutenant Governor in Texas strangely has more political power than the Governor.
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:13 AM
The Cliff Notes version of my previous post is this. If Obama's Justice Department doesn't want a state to pass a law, they will preclude the courts and threaten economic and civil liberty terrorism. This by definition would make Obama a dictator.
Dictator might seem a harsh word to you, but it is accurate just the same.
Bush joked about being a dictator http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD3xfT0c99g now his blood brother Obama is one. The New World Order plan is rolling along and most people are oblivious.
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:44 AM
Rick wrote:
"the main point is the laws that say the Government can stop anyone , anytime , for anything at their whim , expire tonite."
They didn't. Harry Reid's Democrat-controlled Senate was able to overcome Republican opposition to the extension, and the extension of those provisions was passed.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 8:32 AM
i was wrong...Mr.O'Bama signed an extension to the Patriot Act with no debate allowed...
i should have known better...
-- Posted by Rick* on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 9:30 AM
Shame on you Rick... you thought this was still America didn't you?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 9:35 AM
actually , Harry Reid (D) was in favor of extension along with the Republican-led House who passed the extension by a vote of 250 - 153 .
the only dude fighting for debate was Sen. Rand Paul (R) Kentucky .
-- Posted by Rick* on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 9:41 AM
The Cliff Notes version of my previous post is this. If Obama's Justice Department doesn't want a state to pass a law, they will preclude the courts and threaten economic and civil liberty terrorism. This by definition would make Obama a dictator.
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:44 AM
That is scarey!
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 9:52 AM
Mr.O'Bama isn't anybody important when you get right down to it , he squats when he shats just like everyone else..
i ain't ascared of him...
-- Posted by Rick* on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 9:55 AM
"If Obama's Justice Department doesn't want a state to pass a law,......."
So do we now have four branches of government, two which the president is head of?
-- Posted by Old John on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 10:05 AM
Neither the nor the Republicans can be blamed for the "Patriot Act". It came about because "we the people" panicked and demanded "something has to be done, there ought to be a law(s)". "We" are responsible for demanding and/or allowing it.
-- Posted by Acronym on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:09 AM
Acronym,
A big Amen for that thought!
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:48 AM
Lost in translation, should have read "Neither the Democrats nor Republicans"; getting careless.
-- Posted by Acronym on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:10 PM
Spaniard,
Not at all. Rand Paul is a Republican, and his opposition was the biggest obstacle. I notice that you did not chide Rick's earlier mischaracterization of the measure as 'Republican'. Mr. Obama has now twice signed reauthorization measures on this bi-partisan law. Yet, the Democrats seem to shy away from any recognition for their efforts. I wonder why...
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:15 PM
Wheels; I read the article twice. Didn't see where it said Obama made any no fly threats. Show me where it says that and I will conceed that I was wrong. Some search regulations are just stupid. But, in order to try and maintain flying safe, I think these searches are necessary. Not invasive searches, though.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:15 PM
me-thinks some politicians in Washington DC are afraid of committing political suicide by protesting the Patriot Act .
they might be afraid it would give their opponents an advantage in the 2012 elections -- labeling them as un-patriotic...
-- Posted by Rick* on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:22 PM
Wheels; I read the article twice. Didn't see where it said Obama made any no fly threats. Show me where it says that and I will conceed that I was wrong. Some search regulations are just stupid. But, in order to try and maintain flying safe, I think these searches are necessary. Not invasive searches, though.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:15 PM
Did he tell them this directly? No, he is off galavanting around Europe. Maybe I should have added Administration, but we are splitting hairs in as much as what ever comes out of the administrative departments of his branch of the government is his responsibility. Does anybody believe this did not have his blessing? And closing down all of the airports in Texas does create a no fly zone.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:32 PM
Wheels; I read the article twice. Didn't see where it said Obama made any no fly threats. Show me where it says that and I will conceed that I was wrong. Some search regulations are just stupid. But, in order to try and maintain flying safe, I think these searches are necessary. Not invasive searches, though.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:15 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
the sun came up in China this morning...i wasn't there to see it but i know it did...
-- Posted by Rick* on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:45 PM
Wheels; I read the article twice. Didn't see where it said Obama made any no fly threats. Show me where it says that and I will conceed that I was wrong. Some search regulations are just stupid. But, in order to try and maintain flying safe, I think these searches are necessary. Not invasive searches, though.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:15 PM
Obama's Justice Department sent a letter to Texas legislative leaders.
The Austin American Statesman reported: "In the letter delivered to legislative leaders Tuesday, U.S. Attorney John Murphy of San Antonio warned: "Texas has no authority to regulate federal agents and employees in the performance of their federal duties or to pass a statute that conflicts with federal law." He noted that the federal government would seek a court order to prevent enforcement of the law if passed, and "TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of the passengers and crew."
If that is not threatening a type of No Fly Zone over Texas, then I don't know what is.
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:47 PM
TC, I understand Texas is also battling oil production being threatened by a lizard of endangered species.
-- Posted by Old John on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 12:52 PM
TC: No that is not a threat. It is enforcing a law that is on the books. It couldn't be anymore clearer that that. Get off the Obama kick. You are embarrassing yourself with such stupidity.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:01 PM
howdydoody
maybe this is a problem we have to overcome ...why does a Federal Law always trump a State Law ...do we all just assume this hiarchy as legitimate or do we start to ask questions ...
how many layers of laws and Government are truly needed ? we have Federal , State , Local..people are taxed to death and regulated to death...
-- Posted by Rick* on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:26 PM
I am disappointed that Texas wasn't able to tell the feds what to do with their 'no fly zone'.
-- Posted by one4kids on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:58 AM
I was disappointed and disgusted too. The State of Texas should have called the feds bluff. Lt. Governor Dewhurst wants to fill the retiring Kay Bailey Hutchinson's U.S. Senate seat, so he decided to side with Obama rather than his fellow Texans. The man is a coward.
It's a good thing Dewhurst wasn't at the Alamo instead of Jim Bowie and William Travis. He would have unconditionally surrendered to Gen. Santa Anna without even putting up a fight..
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:27 PM
TC: No that is not a threat. It is enforcing a law that is on the books. It couldn't be anymore clearer that that. Get off the Obama kick. You are embarrassing yourself with such stupidity.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 1:01 PM
There is no law that says a TSA agent can touch a persons private parts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pb5Jtl9B57U Homeland Security is not above the law. A cop can't touch a person like that without probable cause. You might be o.k. with the federal government groping people using the guise of security but I am not.
I could say, well I will just let them get away with this and I just won't fly, but the TSA has said they want to expand their tentacles in all forms of travel.
The federal government is not God. They can not toss away the 4th and 10th amendment just because they want. I have not singled out Obama. I have spoken out against government tyranny regardless of party. Go back in history and read my posts about Bush. However I believe Obama is Bush on steroids.
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 2:13 PM
Bush pushed the Patriot Act under the guise of Security...O'Bama pushed the National HealthCare Act under the guise of health...
both used the US Constitution out of text to fit their needs , IMHO...
-- Posted by Rick* on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 2:56 PM
Wheels I can not find where the President threaten Texas with a No Fly Zone. TSA is enforcing federal law those TSA agents have to do what they are told and directed by law to do. Some times Texas jumps to extremes on issues without thinking it out. I don't like the body searches either, best way to that is go through the scanner at the airport it is quick and you are on your way. The people that refuse to enter the scanner receive the searches from TSA.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 4:06 PM
Old John you been watching to much Hannity who constantly stirs it up every night.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 4:09 PM
-- Posted by Thought Criminal on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 9:12 PM
But yet you remain deafeningly silent when Wheels and Regret sling nasty lies and insults. I wonder why...
-- Posted by Spaniard on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 4:32 PM
Look you little weasel... I do not lie!
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 9:28 PM
Thank you Dr. Swampeast for your diagnosis.
I have chronicled my opinion about what I see as a gradual hi-jacking of the Justice Dept by the Executive Branch since President Clinton and Janet Reno days.
Maybe your Micheal Hanity gets the ideas you hear from him on these threads.
-- Posted by Old John on Fri, May 27, 2011, at 11:00 PM
i thought hannity was something a person had with grits , no ?
-- Posted by Rick* on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 12:20 AM
Spaniard,
Sen. Paul is a Republican, and it was his Republican opposition that had to be overcome, as I've already noted. I could hardly call it 'Democrat opposition' now, could I?
I don't care who calls who names. I'm merely pointing out that you seem loathe to permit me to attach the adjective 'Republican' to the opposition, even though it is clearly Republican in its origin, yet you permit the same adjective to be used to describe a bi-partisan measure whose extension is being pressed by a Democrat president. My comment was more related to your curious reaction to the use of the adjective than to any obligation I feel you have regarding the nature of posts.
When the name-calling starts, I usually quit following the threads. I generally comment on the name-calling when it is in a response to one of my own posts, or is directed at me. I've said before, I don't know most of you, and I don't know which of you know each other personally, so I have no idea if your gibes and jeers are friendly banter or not. Nor is it my job to police such things.
If you call Wheels a liar, or he calls you one, that is between you and he. However, if someone says "Republicans are bigots", I take offense because, as a Republican, I have just been called a bigot. If someone says something derogatory about liberals, it is hard for me feel offended, not being a liberal. I will leave it to a liberal to call them out on it.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 12:36 AM
Rick, :) I listened to Hanity a while when he first came on radio, he never let anyone else make a point, like he's right and everyone else is wrong. I'm more of a Barry Farber and Ken Hamblin fan with a fondness for the late Derry Brownfield. I like Micheal Savage not for his opinions or politics but for the simple fact he is interesting.
One guy is asking if the bill was signed in accordance with the constitution via "auto pen".
He even wrote the president a letter. Ha! Good luck with that!
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 12:56 AM
i wouldn't know Hanity if they walked up and slapped me in the face ..
aiyee ! where there auto-pens in 1777 ?
-- Posted by Rick* on Sat, May 28, 2011, at 2:48 AM
Menu
Was this on last night's news. If it was I missed it.
http://www.texastribune.org/texas-legislature/82nd-legislative-session/fed-threa...
Replies (44)